Watercolor vs. Gouache
FotoDave
that gouache uses precipitated chalk as filler to add body, and cheap poster
colors uses opaque white as filler.
But W&N's web page specifically says that their gouaches don't use filler.
Instead, they use more pigment, so the colors can be more saturated.
Then I don't understand why gouaches are less expensive than watercolor. If it
has more pigment but cheaper, why can't I buy gouache and dilute it and use as
watercolor?
Dave
Steen Djervad
to have a transparent colormedia the watercolor is it, if you want to paint in
opaqe layers you schould choose guache, both guache and watercolors in best
quality is expensive at first sight, but its often more inexpensive than the
cheaper kind, becaurse of the dense pigmentation..
Please see my watercolor page about this
Kindly SD
Steen Djervad
Marilyn
> Re: Watercolor vs. Gouache
>
> References:
> [4]<199808190448...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
>
>I have worked in watercolour and gouache.
>I have found that the gouache washes have a more intense colour than
>watercolour . Gouache can be used to do transparent washes, however there
>is still a slight opaque finish which retards natural light. Gouache
>paintings usually have more body than watercolour, however watercolour has a
>softer finish, and allows the light to penetrate through the wash to the
>white of the paper giving the illusion of natural light. This is largely
>why commercial artists are more prone to using gouache for the purposes of
>illustration and design, whilst the use of watercolour is mainly reserved
>for the artist interpretation of landscapes, seascapes etc.
>
Watercolour paints can be used for any subject or non-objective paintings.
It is possible to apply as many as 6 glazes or layers with watercolour
and achieve the intensity of gouache. As it flows more freely than
gouache, I find it easier to use.
Where gouache comes in handy is in its covering power.
I would never think "watercolour vs gouache"
but rather "watercolour and gouache"
They enhance one another.
Marilyn
>Depending on the type of material you chose to work on, gouache is much more
>forgiving, it allows you to cover large areas with an opaque wash, whereas
>this is not possible in watercolour.
>
>Further, the limitations pertaining to the use of watercolour only relate to
>traditional methods, i.e. the exclusion of white. Where white is utilised,
>for the purposes of watercolour painting, the effect achieved is quite
>similar to that of gouache.
White is not excluded, the white of the paper makes it redundant, but
Chinese white can be used.
>Hope this helps!
>
>
>
>FotoDave wrote in message
><199808190448...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>>Dave
The pigments are not as finely ground as in watercolour paints.
They each have advantages which you will realize after a lot of
experimentation of your own. The trick is to just buy
the primary colours of each.
Marilyn
--
* Marilyn Welch *
wq...@victoria.tc.ca
Victoria BC Canada
FotoDave
Ah, I am looking for information like this.
I guess I didn't explain my application in my original post. The reason is
because I am not asking the question for painting purposes. I do paint and am
familiar with using gouache and watercolor.
But now I am getting into alternative photography where one prepares their own
light-sensitive with pigment and sensitizer (dichromate). One can use gouache
or watercolor (or powder pigment).
One thing is, if you compare gouach and watercolor, same brand, same pigment,
the gouach is cheaper (like W&N burnt sienna gouache vs W&N burnt sienna
watercolor), but I need to know what's the difference because it might affect
the look of my final image.
So if you have information concerning the size of pigment, amount of gum, maybe
even filler, glycerin in gouache vs watercolor, please share about it (them).
Thanks a lot in advance!
Dave
m...@vinsel.com
> I would never think "watercolour vs gouache"
> but rather "watercolour and gouache"
> They enhance one another.
That works almost everywhere you see or hear "vs".
> They each have advantages which you will realize after a lot of
> experimentation of your own. The trick is to just buy
> the primary colours of each.
Yes, and arrange them on a round plate. Arranging colors in a line on the
regular watercolor palettes doesn't make sense to me. Colors make a wheel.
Simplification reduces deliberation. I use only Rose Madder, Aureolin, and
Cobalt Blue except for an occasional exception. With just a few pigments you
get very comfortable with how they work with each other.
I'm curious to see work of other water media painters that work in a
restricted palette.
Mark Vinsel
www.vinsel.com
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Helen Lawler
I have found that the gouache washes have a more intense colour than
watercolour . Gouache can be used to do transparent washes, however there
is still a slight opaque finish which retards natural light. Gouache
paintings usually have more body than watercolour, however watercolour has a
softer finish, and allows the light to penetrate through the wash to the
white of the paper giving the illusion of natural light. This is largely
why commercial artists are more prone to using gouache for the purposes of
illustration and design, whilst the use of watercolour is mainly reserved
for the artist interpretation of landscapes, seascapes etc.
Depending on the type of material you chose to work on, gouache is much more
forgiving, it allows you to cover large areas with an opaque wash, whereas
this is not possible in watercolour.
Further, the limitations pertaining to the use of watercolour only relate to
traditional methods, i.e. the exclusion of white. Where white is utilised,
for the purposes of watercolour painting, the effect achieved is quite
similar to that of gouache.
Hope this helps!
Brother Alphabet
I have a few comments on restricted palettes. I'll admit first of all that
I did not see the original post from this thread, so I do not know if the
poster was a beginner at watermedia or if this was just a general debate.
My comments are directed primarily (no pun intended) at beginning
watercolor painters...
> > I would never think "watercolour vs gouache"
> > but rather "watercolour and gouache"
> > They enhance one another.
>
> That works almost everywhere you see or hear "vs".
Fire vs Gasoline - They DO enhance one another, but sometimes it's useful
(and better) to keep things separated.
Depending upon your methodology, guache is not always the best media to
use in conjunction with transparent watercolors. The thickness and opacity
of guache can wreak havok on the layering process...It is good to treat
each separately as often as you use them jointly to fully appreciate the
capacities and uses of both.
> > They each have advantages which you will realize after a lot of
> > experimentation of your own.
"Ditto"...("Ditto?...Ditto, you provencial putz?" - Hedley Lamarr)
> The trick is to just buy the primary colours of each.
Er. Bleah.
What a dullllll palette!
Buy as many pigments as you can afford, or at least all those which strike
your eye.
Limiting your array of colors is NOT an excersize worthwhile for someone
just starting out. Limiting the palette is an excersize in discipline and
is most certainly not a cardinal rule for making pictures. I have about 75
various pigments in my array, and of those I regularly use about 18 or 20.
The problem with using "The primaries" is that not all the primaries are
the same...Which blue is the best blue? Or red or yellow...There are 8 or
10 common versions of each hue in most watercolor product lines.
I say why bother deciding...buy all the hues you like. I regularly use 4
blues in my base array. I have also 3 reds, 3 violets and 3 greens in my
base set. The only color I stay with one of is yellow.
> Yes, and arrange them on a round plate. Arranging colors in a line on the
> regular watercolor palettes doesn't make sense to me. Colors make a
> wheel.
Geez. Why so anal?
My watercolor palette would probably give you nightmares. First of all,
forget arranging your pigments in a logical order. Ordering your paints
according to the color wheel will not help you to make a painting. Arrange
your paints according to your own preferences. If you have the problem of
FORGETTING the wheel's order (as though that ever really applies to
composition) you can buy a color wheel on a little card which you can
refer to as needed.
Or, memorize this:
yellow
yellow-orange
orange
red-orange
red
red-violet
violet
blue-violet
blue
blue-green
green
yellow-green.
Or, you could go for the gusto and memorize this:
yellow
yellow-orange
orange-yellow
orange
orange-red
red-orange
red
red-violet
violet-red
violet
violet-blue
blue-violet
blue
blue-green
green-blue
green
green-yellow
yellow-green.
Y+B=G B+G=BG
Y+R=O R+O=RO
B+R=V R+V=RV
B+Y=G Y+G=YG
R+B=V B+V=BV
R+Y=O Y+O=YO....ugh....etc etc etc.
Red is the compliment of? Greeeeen!
Yellow is the compliment of? Violet!
Blue is the compliment of? Orange!
Rule of thumb: Take 1 Primary, and mix the other 2 and you have the
complimentary relationships...
Oooh, oooh, shall we discuss ANALOGOUS colors? Whee!
Blue, Blue-Violet, and Violet are analogous! Wow!
Blue, Blue-green and Green are analogous! Neat!
Oh, it could go on and on and most of us have known this since
kindergarten.
Forget round palettes...Get a big fat huge palette. Mix in the middle and
for pete's sake don't wash the thing when you're done. Let all the
pigments do their thing in the center. Before you know it you'll have
colors people haven't even named yet. Learn to use any and EVERY color.
If you want some disciplinary excersize, do color studies of still-lifes
in which your goal is to match as many colors as possible. Start with a
low color goal, like 10...then increase the number of values as time
goes by...Before you know it, you'll be able to identify and match 50 or
60 or 70 colors on and around a single apple (or whatever it is you're
studying...).
Excersizes like those are what you should work on to familiarize yourself
with the tools and the media as well as to orient yourself to the palette
with which you feel most comfortable. "Just the primaries" will not help
you with that and will most likely drive you crazy when trying to match
color. Being driven crazy like that is not so bad once you know what the
pigments do, but if you're a beginner it is something that can frustrate
you enough to make painting something you don't want to do.
As a beginner, there must be an organized chaos. Set out intent on making
messes. Play with the paints, the paper etc and observe and note what
happens when you mix Alizarine Crimson with Cobalt Blue...etc etc. After
you have made some messes and ruined a number of sheets of paper, organize
the chaos...Decide upon a 14-20 color base palette. Make sure that the
primaries, while not the focus, are at least adequately represented.
Then, set up your studies. Make no sketches or drawings. Try to paint your
subject by blocking in the colors, and try to make those colors as close
to what you see as possible. (It would help to use a pinhole screen to
isolate areas of color...)
If you want to learn to use a specific color, or color scheme, don't limit
your palette, limit your subject...Use red or blue or other colored
lighting. That way, while all of the colors on and around your subject
contain red. You can still use the full array of pigments to produce a
mostly-red composition.
> Simplification reduces deliberation.
Simplification robs your eye. Deliberation helps train your eye to see
MORE. The more you see and the better you see, the better you can compose.
If simplification was the core objective then why not forget all
color...use black and white paint. Then all you have to worry about is
value and proportion. Basically, when you limit your palette you limit
your range. Contrary to what many think, you can not mix all colors from
just the 3 primaries. You need a much wider range of pigment.
> I use only Rose Madder, Aureolin, and
> Cobalt Blue except for an occasional exception. With just a few pigments you
> get very comfortable with how they work with each other.
And you can stay that comfortable (or complacent) and never have a clue
how other pigments might help your work.
BTW, why do you use a semi-opaque like cobalt as your PRIMARY? Cobalt
isn't even primary blue (technically)...cerulean or french ultramarine
would be better mixers.
Anyway...Just remember that "Restricted Palette" refers mostly to color
scheme and not the number of pigments you employ, and, if you really want
to practice with restricted palettes, the 3 primaries are not your best
option. A 5 color restricted palette, with analogous scheme and 2
compliments as well as black and white would be your best approach.
'Black!? White!? In watercolor?!'
Why, yes...
'Egads! Don't you "save your whites" as all good watercolorists do?'
Well, not all the time...and I'm not a watercolorist, I'm a painter...
'Don't you layer and layer to get your darks?'
Well, sometimes yes and sometimes, black works better.
That's another handy rule: If you need black, use black, and don't pansy
around trying to mix a dark. Add pigments to black to tone your darks if
it's that much of a big deal. If you can't muster the courage to use
black, layer grumbacher Mauve over W&N Indian Yellow. Now, THAT's a DARK!
And also don't forget to PAINT. Don't daub around like a debutante with
watercolors. Watercolor is a fearless, agressive and potent media (if you
want it to be.)
Hutto
-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-
"I paint what I think, not what I see..." - Pablo Picasso
"You're not the boss of me!..." - J. A. Hutto (Pre age 3)
http://www2.msstate.edu/~jah10 + ja...@ra.msstate.edu
Marilyn
> Re: Watercolor vs. Gouache
>
> From: m...@vinsel.com
> Reply to: [1]m...@vinsel.com
> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 23:34:27 GMT
> Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
> Newsgroups:
> [2]rec.arts.fine
> Followup to: [3]newsgroup(s)
> References:
> [4]<35dae...@news.victoria.tc.ca>
>
> Marilyn wrote:
>> I would never think "watercolour vs gouache"
>> but rather "watercolour and gouache"
>> They enhance one another.
>
>That works almost everywhere you see or hear "vs".
>
Well, please forgive me, group for stating the obvious.
Marilyn
>I'm curious to see work of other water media painters that work in a
>restricted palette.
It is interesting to group the red/yellow/blue into different varieties,
for example using brillant r/y/b or earthy r/y/b, or transparent r/y/b.
>
>Mark Vinsel
>www.vinsel.com
>
Okie Teeya
ja...@isis.msstate.edu says...
>The problem with using "The primaries" is that not all the primaries are
>the same...Which blue is the best blue? Or red or yellow...There are 8 or
>10 common versions of each hue in most watercolor product lines.=20
That's so true but not limited to primaries. It seems to be
true across different brand names, especially in the
lower quality grades where they blend for economy sake.
I did notice in the new Daniel Smith catalog that there is
a beginner's set of Golden Acrylic colors that is advertised
as "Golden Acylics Color Mixing Set" containing the eight 'best'
mixing colors in the Golden acrylic line. That set of hues
may NOT work in another manufacturer's list. But it sure
would be nice if all manufacturers would put together
similar lists of those colors offered that mix well together
to give the secondary, tertiary, etc. Would make life so
much simpler for all of us. I have personally always
'tested' the colors in a given palette of mine to make sure
that I get the results I want. Keep a color chart available
to refer back to and retest when I buy new or unknown
to me manufacturer's colors. Okie Teeya.